Don`t know if I`m more worried about the obvious `feeder clubs` (which is definately the road we are going down now) or the fact that in the above article it states his trust in Gary Thornton`s judgement!!

Mr Wilson doesn't seem to grasp that fans are not in favour of losing clubs identities. I would not follow fax if it was a team with 4 or 5 dual reg players from a "parent club" we are no ones bitches, off the field, we may get spanked from time to time but so be it.

I never thought I would see the day such a proud club as the bulldogs would go down this route, especially as deals are Done by handshakes only at batley. It could be a case of they don't want to get left behind as fax, fev & Sheffield very well might.

Mr Wilson doesn't seem to grasp that fans are not in favour of losing clubs identities. I would not follow fax if it was a team with 4 or 5 dual reg players from a "parent club" we are no ones bitches, off the field, we may get spanked from time to time but so be it.

I never thought I would see the day such a proud club as the bulldogs would go down this route, especially as deals are Done by handshakes only at batley. It could be a case of they don't want to get left behind as fax, fev & Sheffield very well might.

I really doubt whether any of the above mentioned clubs will get left behind in a playing sense. At Batley, I would say that the only true stand out dual reg player I have seen was McGilvary. All the others have at best been as good as what we already had. My point here therefore is that the clubs in ther top 5 or 6 have probably not got much to gain on the playing side by entering into these agreements other than to increase depth of squad. The gains might be in use of facilities and the garnering of commercial expertise from these partnerships. Could we honestly say that Harrison, Kear, Aston or Powell have much to learn on the coaching side? Or is that arrogant?

Looking at it from the rational point of view, there may be benefits to my club and anything that ensures the continued existence of Batley I would applaud. After all, 130+ years of pride, heritage and tradition are worth saving almost, and I repeat almost at any cost.

Speaking from the heart though, I would not like to see players from a SL club getting game time when not necessary or not up to it. While I trust the administrators of my club to do the right thing for the club, as they have been doing for years, I would be dismayed if my perception was that we were playing other players at the behest of a so - called senior club. That would be the end of it for me, which sounds a bit dramatic but is nevertheless the position I find myself in. I am waiting, with some trepidation I have to say on the outcome of the negotiations between Batley and the SL clubs as mentioned in the interview with Paul Harrison.

"BATLEY BULLDOGS are on the verge of announcing a ground-breaking partnership which delighted head coach John Kear believes will leave rival Co-operative Championship clubs looking on in envy.

It is understood the Bulldogs will confirm a deal with a local Super League side over the coming days, but the Mount Pleasant outfit’s plans will blow those of their rivals “out of the water”, according to the former England boss.

Rivals Dewsbury Rams recently unveiled their link-up with Bradford Bulls, which is set to see players from the top flight ply their trade in the sport’s second tier while, in return, some of the Championship’s best could gain their chance on rugby league’s big domestic stage.

A number of other part-time clubs have followed suit, Hunslet Hawks tying the knot with Super league champions Leeds Rhinos, though Kear, who wishes to make full use of his 25-man squad in 2013, insists Batley’s agreement will be different and far superior, based mainly on player welfare.

“I am not a fan of the feeder or takeover concept, but the deal we have in place will blow all other partnerships out of the water,” revealed Kear.

“Our agreement, if it comes off, with one of the Super League clubs is based on player welfare and, in my opinion, will leave the other Championship clubs startled. It is set to be truly fantastic for all concerned.

“We have absolutely no interest in becoming a production line for a bigger club and I have fully assessed the benefits which other clubs are, or in some cases are not, getting as part of similar agreements. Ours, however, will certainly stand out from the crowd.”

Kear put the finishing touches to his new-look squad on Tuesday following the capture of dual-registration forward Daniel Fleming. "

I never thought I would see the day such a proud club as the bulldogs would go down this route, especially as deals are Done by handshakes only at batley. It could be a case of they don't want to get left behind as fax, fev & Sheffield very well might.

This whole feeder club nonsense will make a mockery of the championship. Just supposing, the link up of say Hunslet and York with there parent clubs are a roaring success and they both finish in the top 2 after the full season. Towards the end of the season, when the playoffs come around, there parent clubs' have an injury crisis after a long SL season, Leeds and Hull pull all of there quality lads back to play for them, York and Hunslet find themselves in a position of having to play there lads who have not played much all season, as there places have been taken by the SL wannabes week in week out.

What I'm getting at is, the fixtures could well decide your final position in the championship table before a ball is kicked. If you play any of the feeder clubs at the beginning of the season, when they are at full strength with a fist full of SL stars at there disposal they will be a very different proposition to what they will be at the end of the season, when there parent club will be more likely to be suffering an injury crises and recalling all there supposed stars.

This whole feeder club nonsense will make a mockery of the championship. Just supposing, the link up of say Hunslet and York with there parent clubs are a roaring success and they both finish in the top 2 after the full season. Towards the end of the season, when the playoffs come around, there parent clubs' have an injury crisis after a long SL season, Leeds and Hull pull all of there quality lads back to play for them, York and Hunslet find themselves in a position of having to play there lads who have not played much all season, as there places have been taken by the SL wannabes week in week out.

What I'm getting at is, the fixtures could well decide your final position in the championship table before a ball is kicked. If you play any of the feeder clubs at the beginning of the season, when they are at full strength with a fist full of SL stars at there disposal they will be a very different proposition to what they will be at the end of the season, when there parent club will be more likely to be suffering an injury crises and recalling all there supposed stars.

Whilst many of us are concerned at how these changes may ultimately affect us I don't think and endless series of "what ifs" are truly helpful. Let's see how it all pans out then complain - as we (I) will.

I read an article recently by Webster the ex-Widnes lad, (I think it was Ian Webster but not certain) who now plays in the Queensland cup, a competition supposedly similar in strength to the Championship, (I'm not certain but isn't that the one where Mennell played a couple of years back?) Anyway, Webster states in the article that the Championship in the UK is more consistent due to clubs not being affiliated to SL teams. Therefore clubs over here can field a settled side week in week out. In the Queensland Cup, you can come up against a team consisting of half a dozen or so NRL players one week, then the following week only 1 of the NRL players might be playing for the same team as they have returned to there parent club. Can you honestly tell me how this scenario will make our division better?

Surely even you BSJ, regardless of your unwavering love of all things the RFL seem to do, can see the similarities between the scenario of the Queensland cup and the future of the championship?

Believe it now or later, this link-up thing is the thin end of the wedge and it is going to make the game even more farcical. By all means come back to me in a couple of seasons and tell me "I told you so", I hope you are tbh, but I cannot see it. Attendances will have dropped even further, due to the fact the paying public have been driven away because the RFL and some "lower" clubs have sold there souls and destroyed what was once a very good competition, Same goes out to you Gav, with your rose tinted article on the Love RL website. But alas I fear your optimism will be short lived

Alot of clubs attendances were up last year hardly driving people away from the game.

Homer: How is education supposed to make me feel smarter? Besides, every time I learn something new, it pushes some old stuff out of my brain. Remember when I took that home winemaking course, and I forgot how to drive?

You said dropped even further implying they had already dropped. Maybe read your posts first then reply?

Homer: How is education supposed to make me feel smarter? Besides, every time I learn something new, it pushes some old stuff out of my brain. Remember when I took that home winemaking course, and I forgot how to drive?

I think implying that on a whole, gates are low in the championship. Which they are.

If you compare attendances from the latter years of the stones bitter championship 2, looking at comparable teams such as ourselves and the crowds over the past few seasons, attendances have definately dropped.

I read an article recently by Webster the ex-Widnes lad, (I think it was Ian Webster but not certain) who now plays in the Queensland cup, a competition supposedly similar in strength to the Championship, (I'm not certain but isn't that the one where Mennell played a couple of years back?) Anyway, Webster states in the article that the Championship in the UK is more consistent due to clubs not being affiliated to SL teams. Therefore clubs over here can field a settled side week in week out. In the Queensland Cup, you can come up against a team consisting of half a dozen or so NRL players one week, then the following week only 1 of the NRL players might be playing for the same team as they have returned to there parent club. Can you honestly tell me how this scenario will make our division better?

Surely even you BSJ, regardless of your unwavering love of all things the RFL seem to do, can see the similarities between the scenario of the Queensland cup and the future of the championship?

Believe it now or later, this link-up thing is the thin end of the wedge and it is going to make the game even more farcical. By all means come back to me in a couple of seasons and tell me "I told you so", I hope you are tbh, but I cannot see it. Attendances will have dropped even further, due to the fact the paying public have been driven away because the RFL and some "lower" clubs have sold there souls and destroyed what was once a very good competition, Same goes out to you Gav, with your rose tinted article on the Love RL website. But alas I fear your optimism will be short lived

Hi DF. If you are such a fan of my postings as you claim ( ) you would know that I have quoted exactly the same article and stated exactly the same concerns that, indeed, this could be the thin end of the wedge. However I have tried, but occasionally failed, to avoid going down the extrapolated "what if" route as it is so easily countered. What I have forecast is that IF such a development as the feeder club system were to come about then the game will instantly lose many of its traditional followers who won't simply support a shirt. However, we do need to place some faith and trust in those who have successfully led our respective clubs in recent years and clearly demonstrated their sincere good intentions towards them.

I think implying that on a whole, gates are low in the championship. Which they are.

If you compare attendances from the latter years of the stones bitter championship 2, looking at comparable teams such as ourselves and the crowds over the past few seasons, attendances have definately dropped.

Do you have those numbers to post? They would make interesting reading I'm sure.

Do you have those numbers to post? They would make interesting reading I'm sure.

Not sure the figures mean much anyway. I think our average attendances were quoted at about 1100, much the same as the previous two years, but I'm pretty sure they only crept up there because of good gates against the dogs, fev, fax and leigh. Unless I heard wrong, most of the attendances this year were announced at around the 800 mark. We seemed, crowdwise to be better off being a winning side in ch1, (sorry, don't have the figures to back that up, but it felt like it), so effectively attendances have dropped.

Not sure the figures mean much anyway. I think our average attendances were quoted at about 1100, much the same as the previous two years, but I'm pretty sure they only crept up there because of good gates against the dogs, fev, fax and leigh. Unless I heard wrong, most of the attendances this year were announced at around the 800 mark. We seemed, crowdwise to be better off being a winning side in ch1, (sorry, don't have the figures to back that up, but it felt like it), so effectively attendances have dropped.

So what you are saying is your opinion isn't actually based on any actual facts? And you are strangely disregarding crowds against the bigger teams in the league to suit your agenda? Interesting.